arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv 1607.06262astro-ph.COgr-qchep-phhep-th
收藏

普朗克2015年之后的暗能量模型比较

Comparison of dark energy models after Planck 2015

Yue-Yao Xu, Xin Zhang

摘要:

根据十种典型的、流行的暗能量模型对现有观测数据的拟合能力,对它们进行了比较。我们在这项工作中使用的观测数据包括Ia型超新星观测的JLA样本、宇宙微波背景观测的普朗克2015距离先验、重子声学振荡测量和哈勃常数的直接测量。由于模型具有不同数量的参数,为了进行公平的比较,我们采用Akaike和贝叶斯信息标准来评估模型的价值。分析结果表明,就解释观测的能力而言,宇宙学常数模型仍然是所有暗能量模型中最好的一个。广义Chaobergin气体模型、常数$w$模型和$α$暗能量模型比宇宙学常数模型差,但与其他模型相比仍然是好的模型。全息暗能量模型、新的广义Chaubergin气体模型和Chevalliear-Polarski-Linder模型仍然可以很好地拟合当前的观测结果,但从经济可行的角度来看,它们并不那么好。新的年龄暗能量模型、Dvali-Gabadadze-Porrati模型和Ricci暗能量模型都被当前的观测结果排除在外。

英文摘要:

We make a comparison for ten typical, popular dark energy models according to their capabilities of fitting the current observational data. The observational data we use in this work include the JLA sample of type Ia supernovae observation, the Planck 2015 distance priors of cosmic microwave background observation, the baryon acoustic oscillations measurements, and the direct measurement of the Hubble constant. Since the models have different numbers of parameters, in order to make a fair comparison, we employ the Akaike and Bayesian information criteria to assess the worth of the models. The analysis results show that, according to the capability of explaining observations, the cosmological constant model is still the best one among all the dark energy models. The generalized Chaplygin gas model, the constant $w$ model, and the $α$ dark energy model are worse than the cosmological constant model, but still are good models compared to others. The holographic dark energy model, the new generalized Chaplygin gas model, and the Chevalliear-Polarski-Linder model can still fit the current observations well, but from an economically feasible perspective, they are not so good. The new agegraphic dark energy model, the Dvali-Gabadadze-Porrati model, and the Ricci dark energy model are excluded by the current observations.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑